Batting Average On Contact

[Skipper Steve]

I just read that Mark McGwire has a higher lifetime BA on contact (BAOC) than Tony Gwynn.

BAOC is where you minus Ks from ABs and then divide hits by that result.

Is this a vaulable stat? I'm still not sure?

[TGwynn19]

Originally posted by Skipper Steve
I just read that Mark McGwire has a higher lifetime BA on contact (BAOC) than Tony Gwynn.

BAOC is where you minus Ks from ABs and then divide hits by that result.

Is this a vaulable stat? I'm still not sure?

It is highly skewed in favor of homerun hitters who strike out A LOT. Not even Ichiro can catch one that goes 500 feet.

In 1998 Big Mac had 509 AB's 152 hits and 155K's
For a BAOC of .429

In 1987 Tony Gwynn had 589 AB's 218 hits and 35 K's
For a BAOC of .394

[Skipper Steve]

Has there ever been a study on what out is the best?

I always thought that a ground out was better than a fly out, and a fly out was better than a punch out.

Reason being, on a ground out - - usually, someone has to catch it clean, then throw it clean, and then someone else has to catch it clean - - - so, there are three chances for an error and increased probably of reaching base. Whereas, with a flyout, it's an easier play and someone just has to catch it.

But, a flyout is better than a K since it has the potential for error and/or runners advancing whereas a K has low probably of error or runner advancement.

[hmrsf]

Deep flyout with a man on 3rd with less than 2 outs is better than a ground out (well that depends where the grounder lands).

That is a very good ? I always believed in productive outs. K can be productive if the batter is interferring with the catchers abilty to throw out a stealing baserunner.

What is your take?

Originally posted by Skipper Steve
I always thought that a ground out was better than a fly out, and a fly out was better than a punch out.

Overall, I'd say a flyout (OF) is better than a groundout (IF), since a groundout can be a DP if a 1B runner is there. A flyout can be a sac fly or simply a 1st or 2nd out at most.

Suzuki was criticized for running out too many IF hits (lack of power), so if a pitcher gives up a warning track hit, even if caught, it shows he can at least be hit.

[Skipper Steve]

Ya'll are looking at outs with runners on - - how about solely from the perspective of the batter? You cannot always assume runners are on - - therefore, IMHO, one should look at what's the best form of "out" in terms of a batter making out and having potential impact himself.

Steve, assuming bases empty (if I'm reading you correctly), I'm wondering how a flyout would in any way be better than a groundout, or a whiff, for that matter? Can you me out on this a little bit?

[TGwynn19]

Skip,

the only response to that question i have is when Tony Gwynn was in a 'slump' and he went 4-4 one night, a sportswriter asked him if he were happy that he is out of his slump. Tony replied that he was not out of his slump. He went on to explain that the 4 hits he got were not good hits, not put where he wanted them. He said that he is happier for himself following a 0-4 night where he hit it solidly rather than the lucky 4-4.

Not sure if that is what you were getting at or not. I have no idea what kind of out has more merit when the bases are empty.

TG, are you referring to getting 4 cheap hits which a good IF-er or OF-er would've thrown him out on but he got lucky (4 for 4), as opposed to hitting the ball very solidly but some great catches were made which resulted in him being thrown out or the ball caught on a liner (0 for 4)?

[Skipper Steve]

Originally posted by Yogi#8Fan
Steve, assuming bases empty (if I'm reading you correctly), I'm wondering how a flyout would in any way be better than a groundout, or a whiff, for that matter? Can you me out on this a little bit?

Read my post in this thread from only a couple of hours ago (11-27-2001 07:46 PM).

[Skipper Steve]

Originally posted by TGwynn19
the only response to that question i have is when Tony Gwynn was in a 'slump' and he went 4-4 one night, a sportswriter asked him if he were happy that he is out of his slump. Tony replied that he was not out of his slump. He went on to explain that the 4 hits he got were not good hits, not put where he wanted them. He said that he is happier for himself following a 0-4 night where he hit it solidly rather than the lucky 4-4.

Of course, given a choice, a batter wants to hit the ball right on the screws every time up.

Originally posted by Skipper Steve
Has there ever been a study on what out is the best?

I always thought that a ground out was better than a fly out, and a fly out was better than a punch out.

Reason being, on a ground out - - usually, someone has to catch it clean, then throw it clean, and then someone else has to catch it clean - - - so, there are three chances for an error and increased probably of reaching base. Whereas, with a flyout, it's an easier play and someone just has to catch it.

But, a flyout is better than a K since it has the potential for error and/or runners advancing whereas a K has low probably of error or runner advancement.

Returning to the post you directed me to, I'll say this: I'm not sure a "study" (as in comparing stats) would be ideal. Perhaps using logic, as TG19 and myself are trying to do might be best.

I'll agree that a groundout allows room for error, especially if it's a chopped ball and the soil is loose, bumpy, whatever. For a speedy runner, making a tough play may be that much more difficult and does require a good fielding, perhaps even athletic 1B-man, especially if the ball isn't thrown accurately.

As to a flyout, that all depends upon how deeply it's hit. There are some which are just standard outs that any competent OF-er can make (given no bright sun in their eyes), and some are potential triples which someone playing too shallow may not get. Given that the caught ball is snow-coned in the mitt, that may have a "good" effect overall, since it shows that the pitcher can get hit.

Skip, if this isn't the response you're looking for, please point me in the right direction a little more.

[CubFan7125]

Any stat that rewards strikeouts doesn't hold a lot of weight with me. Contact is what the game is all about(except in those rare instances where the runner on 1st is stealing.) To me this sounds like a stat that Rob Deer(1409 K's, 158 hits), Dave Kingman(1816 K's, 1575 hits) or the great Reggie(1597 K's, 2584 hits) started.

CF, you're very precise, but Deer had 853 hits and Reggie had 2,597 whiffs. Kingman's stats are accurate.

BTW, I'm trying to get a feel for what I'm writing. Was my last response to Skip on target or off?

[timconnelly]

The problem with the question (as I see it) is that it is looking at everything in generalities when every at bat has specific properties attached to it.

If Mark McGwire comes up to bat with nobody on and 2 outs, his manager would probably trade 4 strikeouts for 1 home run. But with the bases loaded and 1 out, that same strikeout would hurt a lot more.

To get back to the original question, if BAOC is a valuable statistic, the answer is no. Some questions are hard but this is an easy one. There is probably a more useless statistic somewhere but I'm not sure if it's on this planet.